On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 1:37 PM Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 11:10:57AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > CONFIG_IMA is a boolean option, so none of these objects is linked > > into a module. > > > > All the objects in this directory are compiled only when CONFIG_IMA=y > > since this directory is guarded by the parent Makefile: > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_IMA) += ima/ > > > > So, there is no point in creating the composite object, ima.o > > > > Flatten the code into the obj-$(CONFIG_...) form. > > > > Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > > > security/integrity/ima/Makefile | 8 +++----- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/Makefile b/security/integrity/ima/Makefile > > index d921dc4f9eb0..5517486c9154 100644 > > --- a/security/integrity/ima/Makefile > > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/Makefile > > @@ -4,10 +4,8 @@ > > # Measurement Architecture(IMA). > > # > > > > -obj-$(CONFIG_IMA) += ima.o > > - > > -ima-y := ima_fs.o ima_queue.o ima_init.o ima_main.o ima_crypto.o ima_api.o \ > > +obj-y := ima_fs.o ima_queue.o ima_init.o ima_main.o ima_crypto.o ima_api.o \ > > ima_policy.o ima_template.o ima_template_lib.o > > -ima-$(CONFIG_IMA_APPRAISE) += ima_appraise.o > > -ima-$(CONFIG_HAVE_IMA_KEXEC) += ima_kexec.o > > +obj-$(CONFIG_IMA_APPRAISE) += ima_appraise.o > > +obj-$(CONFIG_HAVE_IMA_KEXEC) += ima_kexec.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_IMA_BLACKLIST_KEYRING) += ima_mok.o > > -- > > This patch changes the kernel command line options > > ima.ahash_minsize > ima.ahash_bufsize > > to > ima_crypto.ahash_minsize > ima_crypto.ahash_bufsize > > Intentional? No. I missed those kernel parameters. So, please drop this patch. I see no problem in 3/5, 5/5, but if composite object is preferred for consistency, please feel free to drop them as well. Thanks. > Note that these are documented in > Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt. -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
